John McCain is one of the bravest, giving, and honorable men ever to
have served his country. He is deserving of the highest levels of
respect.People of good intent my not want him to be president, based on
political views, but that does not detract from his lifetime of
dedication to his heritage and nation.

cheers

I am one lifetime Democrat, who will vote for McCain.

I agree most heartedly. McCain is running on the Republican ticket,
but he is truly an Independent, who is not tied to party dictates, as are
the other candidates. He has a track record to prove his independence.
Pulling out of Iraq without stabilizing the area is one of the worst things
we can do. Until we can free ourselves from the dependency on oil
(and that will not happen overnight), we need to keep that region safe
from certain factions who are trying to unstablize the Western world. It
is true that there have not been any more terror attacks on the scale of
9/11, but if these crazies get a hold of the oil and the revenue it brings
in,
they will have the capability to do lots more damage. We are still seeing
terror attacks in Europe and Asia, so the terrorist threat is not gone.

True, we are continuing to lose troops in Iraq, but putting things in
perspective, we lost almost as many troops in one day (D-Day), than we have
lost
in the entire Iraq war. In those days, we did not see the daily names of
soldiers
and sailors lost in WWII because of lack of modern communications and
concerns for support of the war. Now we see daily reports of every single
causualty on our TV's. It keeps the TV networks and newspapers in business,
but does little to support our troops.

Sherwin

"sherwindu" wrote in message
...




John McCain is one of the bravest, giving, and honorable men ever to
have served his country. He is deserving of the highest levels of
respect.People of good intent my not want him to be president, based on
political views, but that does not detract from his lifetime of
dedication to his heritage and nation.

cheers

I am one lifetime Democrat, who will vote for McCain.

I agree most heartedly. McCain is running on the Republican ticket,
but he is truly an Independent, who is not tied to party dictates, as
are
the other candidates. He has a track record to prove his independence.
Pulling out of Iraq without stabilizing the area is one of the worst
things
we can do. Until we can free ourselves from the dependency on oil
(and that will not happen overnight), we need to keep that region safe
from certain factions who are trying to unstablize the Western world.
It
is true that there have not been any more terror attacks on the scale of
9/11, but if these crazies get a hold of the oil and the revenue it
brings
in,
they will have the capability to do lots more damage. We are still
seeing
terror attacks in Europe and Asia, so the terrorist threat is not gone.

True, we are continuing to lose troops in Iraq, but putting things in
perspective, we lost almost as many troops in one day (D-Day), than we
have
lost
in the entire Iraq war. In those days, we did not see the daily names
of
soldiers
and sailors lost in WWII because of lack of modern communications and
concerns for support of the war. Now we see daily reports of every
single
causualty on our TV's. It keeps the TV networks and newspapers in
business,
but does little to support our troops.

Sherwin

History will write the final page in all this. It is far past sad and into
pathetic when we have the list of candidates we have, their pasts, and their
current Three Stooges behavior.

Romney is the ONLY choice in my book. The others are moral whores.

Steve

SteveB wrote:
"sherwindu" wrote in message
...




John McCain is one of the bravest, giving, and honorable men ever to
have served his country. He is deserving of the highest levels of
respect.People of good intent my not want him to be president,
based on political views, but that does not detract from his
lifetime of dedication to his heritage and nation.

cheers

I am one lifetime Democrat, who will vote for McCain.

I agree most heartedly. McCain is running on the Republican
ticket, but he is truly an Independent, who is not tied to party
dictates, as are
the other candidates. He has a track record to prove his
independence. Pulling out of Iraq without stabilizing the area is
one of the worst things
we can do. Until we can free ourselves from the dependency on oil
(and that will not happen overnight), we need to keep that region
safe from certain factions who are trying to unstablize the
Western world. It
is true that there have not been any more terror attacks on the
scale of 9/11, but if these crazies get a hold of the oil and the
revenue it brings
in,
they will have the capability to do lots more damage. We are still
seeing
terror attacks in Europe and Asia, so the terrorist threat is not
gone. True, we are continuing to lose troops in Iraq, but putting things
in perspective, we lost almost as many troops in one day (D-Day),
than we have
lost
in the entire Iraq war. In those days, we did not see the daily
names of
soldiers
and sailors lost in WWII because of lack of modern communications
and concerns for support of the war. Now we see daily reports of
every single
causualty on our TV's. It keeps the TV networks and newspapers in
business,
but does little to support our troops.

History will write the final page in all this.

Unlikely. 'history' is still disputing what the romans got up to.

It is far past sad and into pathetic when we have the list of candidates we have, their pasts, and their current Three
Stooges behavior.

Romney is the ONLY choice in my book. The others are moral whores.

Romney is a fool.

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
SteveB wrote:
"sherwindu" wrote in message
...




John McCain is one of the bravest, giving, and honorable men ever to
have served his country. He is deserving of the highest levels of
respect.People of good intent my not want him to be president,
based on political views, but that does not detract from his
lifetime of dedication to his heritage and nation.

cheers

I am one lifetime Democrat, who will vote for McCain.

I agree most heartedly. McCain is running on the Republican
ticket, but he is truly an Independent, who is not tied to party
dictates, as are
the other candidates. He has a track record to prove his
independence. Pulling out of Iraq without stabilizing the area is
one of the worst things
we can do. Until we can free ourselves from the dependency on oil
(and that will not happen overnight), we need to keep that region
safe from certain factions who are trying to unstablize the
Western world. It
is true that there have not been any more terror attacks on the
scale of 9/11, but if these crazies get a hold of the oil and the
revenue it brings
in,
they will have the capability to do lots more damage. We are still
seeing
terror attacks in Europe and Asia, so the terrorist threat is not
gone. True, we are continuing to lose troops in Iraq, but putting things
in perspective, we lost almost as many troops in one day (D-Day),
than we have
lost
in the entire Iraq war. In those days, we did not see the daily
names of
soldiers
and sailors lost in WWII because of lack of modern communications
and concerns for support of the war. Now we see daily reports of
every single
causualty on our TV's. It keeps the TV networks and newspapers in
business,
but does little to support our troops.

History will write the final page in all this.

Unlikely. 'history' is still disputing what the romans got up to.

It is far past sad and into pathetic when we have the list of candidates
we have, their pasts, and their current Three Stooges behavior.

Romney is the ONLY choice in my book. The others are moral whores.

Romney is a fool.


YOU say it, therefore, it must be true.

All hail Rod!

Rod Speed wrote:

Romney is the ONLY choice in my book. The others are moral whores.

Romney is a fool.

Dr. Lawrence J. Peter (discoverer of "The Peter Principle") once said: "I
have been studying politics all my life and have yet to discover whether we
are being led by well-meaning fools or by really intelligent people who are
just putting us on."

I think both Romney and McCain are well-meaning fools, there's not an ounce
of guile between them: what you see is what you get. Meanwhile O'bama* and
Clinton are intelligent people who are trying to jerk us around.

---
*I think the addition of an apostrophe to his name will make him seem more
Irish, thereby appealing to the Catholic vote.

sherwindu wrote

John McCain is one of the bravest, giving, and honorable men
ever to have served his country. He is deserving of the highest
levels of respect.People of good intent my not want him to be
president, based on political views, but that does not detract
from his lifetime of dedication to his heritage and nation.

I am one lifetime Democrat, who will vote for McCain.

I agree most heartedly. McCain is running on the Republican
ticket, but he is truly an Independent, who is not tied to party
dictates, as are the other candidates. He has a track record
to prove his independence. Pulling out of Iraq without stabilizing
the area is one of the worst things we can do.

Correct. But none of the other candidates that have
any chance of getting elected want to do that either.

Until we can free ourselves from the dependency
on oil (and that will not happen overnight),

It wont happen at all, you watch.

we need to keep that region safe from certain factions
who are trying to unstablize the Western world.

So you support the invasion of Iran too ?

After the fiasco that Iraq turned into ?

It is true that there have not been any more terror attacks on the scale of 9/11,

And not even any even close to that in the US either.

but if these crazies get a hold of the oil and the revenue it
brings in, they will have the capability to do lots more damage.

Wrong. Thats what funded 9/11.

We are still seeing terror attacks in Europe
and Asia, so the terrorist threat is not gone.

Corse it isnt. BUT the invasion of Iraq actually dramatically
increased the terrorist threat, it didnt reduce it.

True, we are continuing to lose troops in Iraq, but putting
things in perspective, we lost almost as many troops in
one day (D-Day), than we have lost in the entire Iraq war.

Correct. BUT WW2 was just a tad more important than Iraq can ever be.

In those days, we did not see the daily names of soldiers and
sailors lost in WWII because of lack of modern communications
and concerns for support of the war. Now we see daily reports
of every single causualty on our TV's. It keeps the TV networks
and newspapers in business, but does little to support our troops.

Irrelevant to whether Iraq should have ever been invaded in the first place.

In article ,
"Rod Speed" wrote:

Pulling out of Iraq without stabilizing
the area is one of the worst things we can do.

Running from Vietnam wasn't so bad. ****ed off a lot of or Vietnamese
supporters but it was good for America because otherwise we would have
stayed and bled even more lives away.

Obviously, there is a political faction in Iraq that is using American
muscle for their own ends. Let's cut the crap.

It's time to go home.
--

Billy

Bush, Cheney & Pelosi, Behind Bars
http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/site/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movemen...George_W._Bush

Billy wrote:

Running from Vietnam wasn't so bad. ****ed off a lot of or Vietnamese
supporters but it was good for America because otherwise we would have
stayed and bled even more lives away.

Obviously, there is a political faction in Iraq that is using American
muscle for their own ends. Let's cut the crap.

It's time to go home.

Why? Because of American lives lost?

Not a good reason. The Americans that are there are volunteers and
recognized that their life or limb might be lost. They signed up in spite of
that possibility. In fact, 85% of those who've served in Iraq or Afghanistan
have re-enlisted at the first opportunity.

To them, it's the job they want to do. Just like a firefighter or policeman
understands the risks in his chosen profession, our warrior class accepts
similar risks.

To our warriors, the chance to kill people and blow things up is their
life's work. Sitting around at Fort ********, Louisiana just won't cut it.
Look, who would ever become a fireman if there was no or little chance of
fighting a fire? Likewise, who would ever become a soldier if there were no
wars.

No, we need a war every ten or fifteen years just to keep the tip of the
spear sharp and encourage new recruits.

As a corollary, where had you rather have 180,000 people who want to kill?
There, or back here?

In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

Billy wrote:

Running from Vietnam wasn't so bad. ****ed off a lot of or Vietnamese
supporters but it was good for America because otherwise we would have
stayed and bled even more lives away.

Obviously, there is a political faction in Iraq that is using American
muscle for their own ends. Let's cut the crap.

It's time to go home.

Why? Because of American lives lost?

Not a good reason. The Americans that are there are volunteers and
recognized that their life or limb might be lost. They signed up in spite of
that possibility. In fact, 85% of those who've served in Iraq or Afghanistan
have re-enlisted at the first opportunity.

To them, it's the job they want to do. Just like a firefighter or policeman
understands the risks in his chosen profession, our warrior class accepts
similar risks.

To our warriors, the chance to kill people and blow things up is their
life's work. Sitting around at Fort ********, Louisiana just won't cut it.
Look, who would ever become a fireman if there was no or little chance of
fighting a fire? Likewise, who would ever become a soldier if there were no
wars.

No, we need a war every ten or fifteen years just to keep the tip of the
spear sharp and encourage new recruits.

As a corollary, where had you rather have 180,000 people who want to kill?
There, or back here?

Re-enliste? Some just kill them selves. Some leave the country when
their tour is extended. Most re-enlist, not because they believe in the
fight but because their buddies, who caught their backs, are still there
and they feel guilty about being out, when their friends are still in
the meat-grinder.

American lives lost? Are you crazy? Each one of them had a name. Each
one of them had a mother and a father who loved them. Each one of them
are patriots who answered the call of their country. How did they know
that the commander in chief was a jive-ass, draft-dodging, mother-****er
who was just going to be helping himself, his daddy, and his friends to
make a little money. Welcome to the New American Century. All Profit,
All the Time. Hell, the ones who got killed are the lucky ones. It's the
other 90% who got broke and are coming home with post-traumatic stress
disorder, who are going to suffer. And you want to put a happy face on
it? Jesus Christ man, the troops did what they were told. They went to
Bagdad and occupied the Ministry of Oil and left the munition dumps
unprotected.

The people of Bagdad were happy to see us. They wanted to thank us. But
we treated them like dirt and kicked them in the teeth.
----------
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...age-grows-afte
r-fallujah-massacre-537969.html

Iraqi rage grows after Fallujah massacre

By Phil Reeves in Fallujah
Sunday, 4 May 2003

Nearly a week after troops from the 82nd Airborne Division randomly
opened fire on a crowd of demonstrators here, prompting the US military
to announce an inquiry, commanders have yet to speak to the doctors who
counted the bodies.

Nor, by late yesterday, had US commanders been to the home of a
13-year-old boy who was among the dead, even though it is located less
than a mile from the main American base in Fallujah, a conservative
Sunni town 35 miles west of Baghdad.

The Americans' conduct over the Fallujah affair * and their highly
implausible version of events * has compounded the anger in Iraq over
the killings, in which 13 people died after being hit by a hail of US
bullets outside a school which the troops were occupying. It combines
all the worst elements of the occupation: panicky troops firing at
Iraqis instead of seeking to engage with them or understand their
circumstances, then insisting that local people have no cause for anger.
---------

Iraqis, in general, respected the US until "W" made them mad enough to
strap a bomb to their backs, may he burn in Hell. If arabs want to kill
westerners now, it's because "W" pushed until they pushed back. "W"
needed a war on terror so that the military-industrial complex could
keep on socking it away. Or was Eisenhower, a real soldier, just full of
crap?

American G.I.s are doing the honorable thing. The Iraqi resistance is
doing the honorable thing. And "W"? Like Iran 1953, "W" is backing the
wackos to keep the pot boiling. We arm both the Sunni and Shia militias.

Wake up. You are being played for a chump.
--

Billy

Bush, Cheney & Pelosi, Behind Bars
http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/site/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movemen...George_W._Bush

Billy wrote:
It's time to go home.

Why? Because of American lives lost?

Not a good reason. The Americans that are there are volunteers and
recognized that their life or limb might be lost. They signed up in
spite of that possibility. In fact, 85% of those who've served in
Iraq or Afghanistan have re-enlisted at the first opportunity.

To them, it's the job they want to do. Just like a firefighter or
policeman understands the risks in his chosen profession, our
warrior class accepts similar risks.

To our warriors, the chance to kill people and blow things up is
their life's work. Sitting around at Fort ********, Louisiana just
won't cut it. Look, who would ever become a fireman if there was no
or little chance of fighting a fire? Likewise, who would ever become
a soldier if there were no wars.

No, we need a war every ten or fifteen years just to keep the tip of
the spear sharp and encourage new recruits.

As a corollary, where had you rather have 180,000 people who want to
kill? There, or back here?

Re-enliste? Some just kill them selves. Some leave the country when
their tour is extended. Most re-enlist, not because they believe in
the fight but because their buddies, who caught their backs, are
still there and they feel guilty about being out, when their friends
are still in the meat-grinder.

Right. Of the 15% who don't re-enlist, some were casualties, some retire,
some move on to other endeavors, some are pussy-whipped by whining wives or
sweethearts.



American lives lost? Are you crazy? Each one of them had a name. Each
one of them had a mother and a father who loved them. Each one of them
are patriots who answered the call of their country. How did they
know that the commander in chief was a jive-ass, draft-dodging,
mother-****er who was just going to be helping himself, his daddy,
and his friends to make a little money.

What difference does the president make in their decision? As for being a
draft-dodger, if the worst you can say about Bush is, that in time of war,
he joined the National Guard...

Welcome to the New American
Century. All Profit, All the Time.

Proft is good.

Hell, the ones who got killed are
the lucky ones. It's the other 90% who got broke and are coming home
with post-traumatic stress disorder, who are going to suffer.

Regrettably, you're correct. We'll do the best we can to provide for them,
but, ultimately, that was the choice they made.

And you
want to put a happy face on it? Jesus Christ man, the troops did what
they were told. They went to Bagdad and occupied the Ministry of Oil
and left the munition dumps unprotected.

Well, yeah. But they did kill a great number of terrorists and potential
terrorists.


The people of Bagdad were happy to see us. They wanted to thank us.
But we treated them like dirt and kicked them in the teeth.
----------
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...age-grows-afte
r-fallujah-massacre-537969.html

Iraqi rage grows after Fallujah massacre

By Phil Reeves in Fallujah
Sunday, 4 May 2003

Nearly a week after troops from the 82nd Airborne Division randomly
opened fire on a crowd of demonstrators here, prompting the US
military to announce an inquiry, commanders have yet to speak to the
doctors who counted the bodies.


[...]

Potential terrorists.



Iraqis, in general, respected the US until "W" made them mad enough to
strap a bomb to their backs, may he burn in Hell. If arabs want to
kill westerners now, it's because "W" pushed until they pushed back.
"W" needed a war on terror so that the military-industrial complex
could keep on socking it away. Or was Eisenhower, a real soldier,
just full of crap?

Uh, who "pushed" the Arabs into the World Trade Center?

Eisenhower, according to his former superior, Douglas McArthur, "...would
make an adequate staff officer."


American G.I.s are doing the honorable thing. The Iraqi resistance is
doing the honorable thing. And "W"? Like Iran 1953, "W" is backing the
wackos to keep the pot boiling. We arm both the Sunni and Shia
militias.

There is no "Iraqi Resistance." Virtually every one (that we have killed or
know about) of the bombers, insurgents, and leaders of such in Iraq are not
from Iraq. Except for Sadaam, of course.


Wake up. You are being played for a chump.

I'm a volunteer. I accept the risks.

On Feb 2, 1:24*am, sherwindu wrote:
John McCain is one of the bravest, giving, and honorable men ever to
have served his country. *He is deserving of the highest levels of
respect.People of good intent my not want him to be president, based on
political views, but that does not detract from his lifetime of
dedication to his heritage and nation.

cheers

* *I am one lifetime Democrat, who will vote for McCain.

* *I agree most heartedly. *McCain is running on the Republican ticket,
* *but he is truly an Independent, who is not tied to party dictates, as are
* *the other candidates. *He has a track record to prove his independence.
* *Pulling out of Iraq without stabilizing the area is one of the worst things
* *we can do. *Until we can free ourselves from the dependency on oil
* *(and that will not happen overnight), we need to keep that region safe
* *from certain factions who are trying to unstablize the Western world. *It
* *is true that there have not been any more terror attacks on the scale of
* *9/11, but if these crazies get a hold of the oil and the revenue it brings
in,
* *they will have the capability to do lots more damage. *We are still seeing
* *terror attacks in Europe and Asia, so the terrorist threat is not gone.


Let's say by some miracle, the US became energy independent next
year. Your statement implies that at that point we could just ignore
the Middle East and the oil that is there. No more problems. In
fact, oil is a worldwide commodity, with demand growing. No matter
what we do, there will be a market for it and the huge oil revenue
will flow there for decades to come. The notion that the US reducing
our dependence on Middle Eastern oil means we can just ignore that
region is a popular but naive position. Suppose Al Qaeda takes over
Iraq or Saudi Arabia? How much revenue do they have now and how much
would they have then? It takes probably .000001% of the Middle East
oil revenue to finance all terrorism. BTW, how much oil did Germany,
Japan have? Yet they managed to start two world wars, didn't they?






* *True, we are continuing to lose troops in Iraq, but putting things in
* *perspective, we lost almost as many *troops in one day (D-Day), than we have
lost
* *in the entire Iraq war. *In those days, we did not see the daily names of
soldiers
* *and sailors lost in WWII because of lack of modern communications and
* *concerns for support of the war. *Now we see daily reports of every single
* *causualty on our TV's. *It keeps the TV networks and newspapers in business,
* *but does little to support our troops.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Sherwin

wrote:


Let's say by some miracle, the US became energy independent next
year. Your statement implies that at that point we could just ignore
the Middle East and the oil that is there. No more problems. In
fact, oil is a worldwide commodity, with demand growing. No matter
what we do, there will be a market for it and the huge oil revenue
will flow there for decades to come. The notion that the US reducing
our dependence on Middle Eastern oil means we can just ignore that
region is a popular but naive position. Suppose Al Qaeda takes over
Iraq or Saudi Arabia? How much revenue do they have now and how much
would they have then? It takes probably .000001% of the Middle East
oil revenue to finance all terrorism. BTW, how much oil did Germany,
Japan have? Yet they managed to start two world wars, didn't they?



Energy independence is mostly a myth. Oil is fungible. Because oil is the
gold of energy, prices of alternative energy affects the price of oil.

Suppose something happened in the U.S. (drilling in ANWAR or offshore
Florida, massive increase in the use of coal or nuclear, etc.) such that
this new source of energy worked out to be 10% less costly than current oil
prices.

The oil that the U.S. does not now import now becomes a glut, driving down
the world-wide price by 10%.

More of something drives down the price. As the price goes down, demand
increases. Increased demand raises the price. Soon, we're back to where we
were, only more energy is being consumed.

You want REAL energy independence? And energy independence on the cheap?

Declare Saudia Arabia to be the 51st state.

Lest you think that's a joke, there is a proposal floating around that Saudi
Arabia (and perhaps others) should have their oil administered by an outside
party (the U.N.?) under the rubric of a "world resource" to be used for the
good of all mankind!

In article ,
sherwindu wrote:

True, we are continuing to lose troops in Iraq, but putting things in
perspective, we lost almost as many troops in one day (D-Day), than we
have
lost
in the entire Iraq war. In those days, we did not see the daily names of
soldiers
and sailors lost in WWII because of lack of modern communications and
concerns for support of the war. Now we see daily reports of every single
causualty on our TV's. It keeps the TV networks and newspapers in
business,
but does little to support our troops.

Sherwin

With this kind of support who needs enemies? In WWII we didn't shot the
people that we were liberating. In WWII we didn't shot journalists who
weren't embedded with our citzen army. In WWII we weren't lied to about
why we were at war. True, this isn't like Vietnam, except for the
bullets, except for the bombs. No more vain-glorious Doo-Doo politics.
Bring our children home.

--
Bush Behind Bars

Billy
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/

In article ,
sherwindu wrote:


John McCain is one of the bravest, giving, and honorable men ever to
have served his country. He is deserving of the highest levels of
respect.People of good intent my not want him to be president, based on
political views, but that does not detract from his lifetime of
dedication to his heritage and nation.

cheers

I am one lifetime Democrat, who will vote for McCain.

I agree most heartedly. McCain is running on the Republican ticket,
but he is truly an Independent, who is not tied to party dictates, as are
the other candidates. He has a track record to prove his independence.
Pulling out of Iraq without stabilizing the area is one of the worst
things
we can do. Until we can free ourselves from the dependency on oil
(and that will not happen overnight), we need to keep that region safe
from certain factions who are trying to unstablize the Western world. It
is true that there have not been any more terror attacks on the scale of
9/11, but if these crazies get a hold of the oil and the revenue it brings
in,
they will have the capability to do lots more damage. We are still seeing
terror attacks in Europe and Asia, so the terrorist threat is not gone.

True, we are continuing to lose troops in Iraq, but putting things in
perspective, we lost almost as many troops in one day (D-Day), than we
have
lost
in the entire Iraq war. In those days, we did not see the daily names of
soldiers
and sailors lost in WWII because of lack of modern communications and
concerns for support of the war. Now we see daily reports of every single
causualty on our TV's. It keeps the TV networks and newspapers in
business,
but does little to support our troops.

Sherwin

So if we didn't know how we were lied to and cheated and, didn't know
what was going on, we would be in a better position to support our
children who patriotically answered our nation's call? But then again,
Doo Doo is a crazed, bigoted Zionist (god, I hate being redundant) whose
first allegiance seems to be to Israel.

Bring our boys and girls home NOW.
--

Billy

Bush, Cheney & Pelosi, Behind Bars
http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/site/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movemen...George_W._Bush

Billy wrote:

In article ,
sherwindu wrote:


John McCain is one of the bravest, giving, and honorable men ever to
have served his country. He is deserving of the highest levels of
respect.People of good intent my not want him to be president, based on
political views, but that does not detract from his lifetime of
dedication to his heritage and nation.

cheers

I am one lifetime Democrat, who will vote for McCain.

I agree most heartedly. McCain is running on the Republican ticket,
but he is truly an Independent, who is not tied to party dictates, as are
the other candidates. He has a track record to prove his independence.
Pulling out of Iraq without stabilizing the area is one of the worst
things
we can do. Until we can free ourselves from the dependency on oil
(and that will not happen overnight), we need to keep that region safe
from certain factions who are trying to unstablize the Western world. It
is true that there have not been any more terror attacks on the scale of
9/11, but if these crazies get a hold of the oil and the revenue it brings
in,
they will have the capability to do lots more damage. We are still seeing
terror attacks in Europe and Asia, so the terrorist threat is not gone.

True, we are continuing to lose troops in Iraq, but putting things in
perspective, we lost almost as many troops in one day (D-Day), than we
have
lost
in the entire Iraq war. In those days, we did not see the daily names of
soldiers
and sailors lost in WWII because of lack of modern communications and
concerns for support of the war. Now we see daily reports of every single
causualty on our TV's. It keeps the TV networks and newspapers in
business,
but does little to support our troops.

Sherwin

So if we didn't know how we were lied to and cheated and, didn't know
what was going on, we would be in a better position to support our
children who patriotically answered our nation's call?

Hey Billy Goat,

Do you have any children in Iraq? I doubt it. Point is, we are not supporting

our troops in Iraq by undermining them with reports of casualties there. If
you
ask the troops over there, most of them want to stay and get the job done.

But then again,
Doo Doo is a crazed, bigoted Zionist (god, I hate being redundant) whose
first allegiance seems to be to Israel.

What have you done to support this country? Have you served in the U.S.
military? I did.
You like to stick labels on people. I see no conflict between supporting Israel
and the
USA at the same time. Is your first allegiance to the Palestinians?

Sherwin



Bring our boys and girls home NOW.

So we can send them back again to clean up the mess we left.

In article ,
sherwindu wrote:

Billy wrote:

In article ,
sherwindu wrote:


So if we didn't know how we were lied to and cheated and, didn't know
what was going on, we would be in a better position to support our
children who patriotically answered our nation's call?

Hey Billy Goat,

Do you have any children in Iraq? I doubt it. Point is, we are not
supporting

our troops in Iraq by undermining them with reports of casualties there.
If
you
ask the troops over there, most of them want to stay and get the job
done.
And this is why you watch Fox News? So you won't know your ass from a
hole in the ground?

But then again, Doo Doo is a crazed, bigoted, land stealing Zionist
(god, I hate being redundant) whose first allegiance seems to be to
Israel.

What have you done to support this country? Have you served in the U.S.
military? I did.
You like to stick labels on people. I see no conflict between supporting
Israel
and the
USA at the same time. Is your first allegiance to the Palestinians?
Nay. My first allegiance is to people who want to raise their children
in peace and take care of their parents when they are old.My first
allegiance is to people who want to spend time with their families and
friends.My first allegiance is to people who want to garden/raise
animals. My first allegiance is to people who want to meet people from
other places and find out how they live and eat. My first allegiance is
to people who want life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all.

Sherwin



Bring our boys and girls home NOW.

So we can send them back again to clean up the mess we left.

When it comes to making a mess, leave it to Doo-Doo.
--

Billy

Bush, Cheney & Pelosi, Behind Bars
http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/site/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movemen...George_W._Bush

Billy wrote:

So if we didn't know how we were lied to and cheated and, didn't know
what was going on, we would be in a better position to support our
children who patriotically answered our nation's call?

What's lying and cheating got to do with it? You think we approved the war
because of lies? We approved the war for the opportunity to kill Islamic
Extremists.


But then again,
Doo Doo is a crazed, bigoted Zionist (god, I hate being redundant)
whose first allegiance seems to be to Israel.

We need Israel. Israel can field 18 divisions of infantry and armor on 72
hours notice. This is a 50% larger force than the authorized strength of the
U.S. ground military (10 Army and 2 Marine divisions).

Israel can deploy 625,000 troops, engaged in combat, on three fronts, in
three days with the first quarter-million coming on line in 24 hours. Israel
can fight a sustained war without significant resupply for 30 days - the
best endurance that NATO ever achieved when facing the Soviets was ten days.


Bring our boys and girls home NOW.

Why? These are our warrior class. They exist to kill and blow things up.
They fight for honor, family, home, and glory. Now you've got to ask
yourself just one question: do you want them over there, or roaming our
cities over here?

In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

Billy wrote:

So if we didn't know how we were lied to and cheated and, didn't know
what was going on, we would be in a better position to support our
children who patriotically answered our nation's call?

What's lying and cheating got to do with it? You think we approved the war
because of lies? We approved the war for the opportunity to kill Islamic
Extremists.
If your not going to keep this real, I may as well walk.


But then again,
Doo Doo is a crazed, bigoted, land stealing, Zionist (god, I hate being
redundant) whose first allegiance seems to be to Israel.

We need Israel. Israel can field 18 divisions of infantry and armor on 72
hours notice. This is a 50% larger force than the authorized strength of the
U.S. ground military (10 Army and 2 Marine divisions).

We need a fascist, murdering, land stealing, pariah state for an ally?
Part of the reason that the arab people are ****ed-off at us is our
unwavering support of the Zionists. They couldn't just come and buy
land. They had to steal it. Putting a muzzle on these thugs would go a
long way to settling the region down.

Israel can deploy 625,000 troops, engaged in combat, on three fronts, in
three days with the first quarter-million coming on line in 24 hours. Israel
can fight a sustained war without significant resupply for 30 days - the
best endurance that NATO ever achieved when facing the Soviets was ten days.

Yeah, and they broke their teeth on Hezbollah.

Bring our boys and girls home NOW.

Why? These are our warrior class. They exist to kill and blow things up.
They fight for honor, family, home, and glory. Now you've got to ask
yourself just one question: do you want them over there, or roaming our
cities over here?

And you are a Spartan? Even the Spartans weren't as nutty as you sound.
You want a warrior class? Look at the samurai. They weren't two
dimensional cartoons. They learned gardening, the tea ceremony,
painting, flower arranging, and poetry but one on one they were bad
dudes. Manchurian farm boys brought them down.

You, you seem to like to posture, posing the bad-boy, either that or you
need clinical help. Comic strip characters aren't real. In Korea, if
there was a noise on the perimeter, an 18 year old jar-head would pull
the pin on a grenade and go check it out. Meanwhile, the oldest guy in
camp (27) would put his head in the lowest place he could find. You want
more Americans with PTSD, when the reason they are in that situation is
a lie? You ain't their buddy.
--

Billy

Bush, Cheney & Pelosi, Behind Bars
http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/site/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movemen...George_W._Bush

HeyBub wrote
Billy wrote

So if we didn't know how we were lied to and cheated and, didn't know what was going on, we would be in a better
position to support our children who patriotically answered our nation's call?

What's lying and cheating got to do with it? You think we approved the war because of lies? We approved the war for
the opportunity to kill Islamic Extremists.

Pity saddam wasnt even that. Neither was his regime.

But then again, Doo Doo is a crazed, bigoted Zionist (god, I hate being redundant) whose first allegiance seems to be
to Israel.

We need Israel.

Nope, it wouldnt matter a damn if the ragheads wiped it out completely.

Israel can field 18 divisions of infantry and armor on 72 hours notice.

In fact steps were taken to keep them out of the first Gulf War, because if
they had got involved, all the other middle eastern countrys wouldnt have got
involved and there wouldnt have been anywhere like Saudi to operate from.

It wouldnt have been possible to kick Saddam out of Kuwait from Isreal.

This is a 50% larger force than the authorized strength of the U.S. ground military (10 Army and 2 Marine divisions).

It aint about grunts in boots anymore.

Israel can deploy 625,000 troops, engaged in combat, on three fronts,
in three days with the first quarter-million coming on line in 24 hours.

Fat lot of good that would have been when driving Saddam out of Kuwait.

Or for invading Iraq either.

Israel can fight a sustained war without significant resupply for 30 days

Depends entirely on what sort of war it is.

- the best endurance that NATO ever achieved when facing the Soviets was ten days.

Isreal never tried it against the Soviets, just some ****wits like the Egyptians.

Bring our boys and girls home NOW.

Why?

Because its costing an immense amount of money to get involved in what is just another civil war.

These are our warrior class.

They've passed their useby date. No one is going to attack america militarily again.

They exist to kill and blow things up. They fight for honor, family, home, and glory.

Many of them do it to get american citizenship.

Now you've got to ask yourself just one question: do you want them over there, or roaming our cities over here?

That was survived fine up until Iraq was invaded. And the first Gulf War
didnt stop fools like McVeigh doing obscenitys back in america anyway.